Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 93

Thread: Tired of being skinny?

  1. #51
    Moderator Off Road's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,884
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMcGuire View Post
    Then why don't you recap your big picture point now. Hows that sound?
    Because there is no point in me wasting my breath, you will just take it somewhere else like you did before with your thoughts on basic nutrition being "adavanced" and turning into a "fat blob" in a very short amount of time and thinking you have to be a nutritional master to figure out how to gain weight.
    _________
    ______
    ___

    Off Road Journal

    http://www.wannabebig.com/logo/alnlogo_white.gif

    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

  2. #52
    Rory Parker Behemoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    5,322
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMcGuire View Post
    Yes, leptin levels are linked to fat cell quantity.

    Hmm, yea, I haven't really read anything concrete about setpoints changing as a result of additional fat cell creation so I'm not sure either. It just seems to make sense. On the brighter side of things, from what I've gathered and read, the body typically hypertrophies existing fat cells well before the creation of new cells occurs. But I have no idea how fat someone would need to become for it to happen.
    For sure leptin is linked to the hypertophy of ones current body fat cells, but I only presumed it to be linked to the hyperplasia of new fat cells and am not fully certain. But logically I don't see why it would not be.

    I'm in agreement with what you said above.
    Last edited by Behemoth; 01-21-2011 at 07:25 PM.
    accuflex - LOLZZZZ!!!11one1!! SOEM PPL WORK THRE ARMZ!!!!11!! LETS KILL THEM111

    "You can fake effort with grunts and clanging weights but quiet, consistent hard work coupled with gradual strength increases earns universal respect in gyms" - Steve Colescott



    I'd rather Situation be a member of this board. -Joey54

  3. #53
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Off Road View Post
    Because there is no point in me wasting my breath, you will just take it somewhere else like you did before with your thoughts on basic nutrition being "adavanced" and turning into a "fat blob" in a very short amount of time and thinking you have to be a nutritional master to figure out how to gain weight.
    So basically, you dont have a big picture point.

    What I said wasn't personal. Just that I don't agree with your post about basic nutrition and "true-bulks". I don't think that means I missed anything or that I think you need a Masters degree in order to gain weight. It means I don't agree with those ideas. It's not "taking it somewhere else" when someone disagrees with specific things you've said in your post. I mean, I can't ignore certain ideas to find this hidden big picture that's trying to be painted. No offense.
    Last edited by RichMcGuire; 01-21-2011 at 08:43 PM.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  4. #54
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Behemoth View Post
    For sure leptin is linked to the hypertophy of ones current body fat cells, but I only presumed it to be linked to the hyperplasia of new fat cells and am not fully certain. But logically I don't see why it would not be.

    I'm in agreement with what you said above.
    Yea. I just figured I'd bounce the idea off you since I know you are well read and know your stuff. If you ever come across anything about set points in that regard, could you pm me? It's something I've wondered myself.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,129
    This thread has taken some very strange twists. Ive read the last few responses, and im not sure what you guys are arguing about. Are you really arguing the definition of a "bulk".

    Ive always considered a "bulk" being the intention of gaininin weight, and more specifically muscle. A "clean bulk" or "slow bulk" is just a slower approach to minimize fat gain, and a "dirty bulk" or "all out bulk" is just a faster weight gain, where you aren't as concerned about fat gain.

    Its a contraversial topic, as this thread points out. This thread is titled "tired of being skinny" and IMO the people that stay skinny are the ones that do not eat enough. Its plain and simple, thats the problem It may be that they are clinging to wanting abs, or they aren't willing to force feed enough calories, or some "dirty foods", or whatever. But there is no way around it. If they aren't getting stronger, and more specifically aren't gaining weight; they aren't eating enough. It doesn't have to do with supplements, or their split, or sleep.

    And based on observations in the gym and from personal experiences, there is a very large population that this applies to. My personal opinion on this, is that people have a skewed understanding of what is attainable and how to attain it. It is there choice, because its their body and their life, but it is a problem in the field.

    Things like:

    Wanting abs and arms (plenty of guys want a six pack and 17"+ arms, but weigh 150lbs)
    All kinds of MMA/conditioning work
    Lack of priorities (they want to get huge and lean at the same time, and get better at running, and play basketball 3x per week)
    Think "clean" eating means low fat (this is my pet peeve. Chicken and brocolli will not get skinny people big)
    Think Crossfit or "general fitness" makes a good body

    The list goes on, and on, and on.

    In addition to that, I think there is a sub-group of people that are a little closer to the right track, but get caught up in the "clean bulk" idea. They want to minimize fat gain so much, that they never eat enough to gain muscle at all, and progress in the gym halts.

    I wasted many years being in those above categories. I finally got fed up with it. I got some advice from some guys that were much bigger and stronger than me. It was to just set a weight goal, and do whatever it takes to hit that goal I think when I first did it, I had a set weight goal for each week. I probably aimed for 2 lbs per week, knowing that it wouldn't happen but 1lb a week was pretty consistant. And for the first time I broke 200lbs. I gained some fat. But I also got a lot stronger, and built muscle. I then maintained that weight for a few months, and in the process got leaner. I then repeated the process again and broke 210. For me, I think this process is the only way that works. Ive never been able to gain 1/2 a lb per week consistantly. Instead, focusing on a goal and getting there seems to work.

    I think another major problem is for people that aren't "tired of being skinny" Ive observed this in a few cases. People that have been the same weight for a pretty long time. They aren't very lean, but not fat either. But without eating enough calories to gain weight, they also seem to not be able to improve in the gym. It may be a mismatch with programming, but they are pretty much stuck in maintanence mode until they decide its worth it to gain some weight.

  6. #56
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Good post Dan. Waaaay too long, but it was a good read :P
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  7. #57
    Moderator Off Road's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    Are you really arguing the definition of a "bulk".
    I'm not. Some others seem to want to take it there though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    A "clean bulk" or "slow bulk" is just a slower approach to minimize fat gain, and a "dirty bulk" or "all out bulk" is just a faster weight gain, where you aren't as concerned about fat gain.
    Exactly, and my recomendation was to clean bulk or "slightly bulk" for the majority of the time. Then when things get very intense and you are entering new teritory, it's time to "dirty bulk" or "true bulk" and really take advantage of what extra nutrition can offer in terms of growth and recovery.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    This thread is titled "tired of being skinny" and IMO the people that stay skinny are the ones that do not eat enough. Its plain and simple, thats the problem
    Thanks, somebody gets how simple it really is. I'm not sure why everybody wants to overcomplicate things.
    _________
    ______
    ___

    Off Road Journal

    http://www.wannabebig.com/logo/alnlogo_white.gif

    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,129
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMcGuire View Post
    Good post Dan. Waaaay too long, but it was a good read :P
    Ya sorry.. I had a spike before my workout.

  9. #59
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    I still think my point is valid Offroad. If someone has been doing "slight bulks" for a very long time as you recommend and has made outstanding results, and potentially is near their genetic ceiling, asking that person to "true-bulk" or "dirty-bulk" or whatever you want to call it, in the hopes that all this extra food is going to magically translate into new muscle tissue is complete nonsense. Why try to over simplify physiology? Sure, you won't be skinny anymore..But then again, most of America isn't skinny.

    The simple part about it is that a person never really needs more than 500-1000 kcals over what they need in a day in order to optimize muscular gains. I'm not sure why THAT is so complicated to understand. Without anabolics, you do not add muscle very easily. There is a very limited potential. Bodyfat, however, is always unlimited. You'll hypertrophy existing fat cells like hot air balloons and then eventually create more cells with hyperplasia. So eat your hearts out I guess.
    Last edited by RichMcGuire; 01-22-2011 at 11:39 AM.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  10. #60
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    Ya sorry.. I had a spike before my workout.
    Lol. Well, sometimes the best literature around is written that way.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  11. #61
    Moderator Off Road's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,884
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMcGuire View Post
    I still think my point is valid Offroad. If someone has been doing "slight bulks" for a very long time as you recommend and has made outstanding results, and potentially is near their genetic ceiling, asking that person to "true-bulk" or "dirty-bulk" or whatever you want to call it, in the hopes that all this extra food is going to magically translate into new muscle tissue is complete nonsense..
    This will be the last time I reply to you in this thread...honestly, I get a headache every time you try to take the conversation somewhere it isn't intended to go... I am not in this thread to debate the differences of slow bulking vs. fast bulking. I'm not interested in debating a what consitutes a preferred body fat percentage. I am simply trying to give hardgainers some tools to break out of their skinny bodies and do it in a sensible way.

    I never, ever mentioned anything about genetic ceilings. When you get there, please let me know.

    I recommend maintenance or very slight excess when people are introducing new exercises, routines, or are at the beginning of their cycles. They are NOT making "outstanding progress" at this point.

    "Oustanding progress" takes gut busting efforts. Those efforts are going to require larger ammounts of food to recover and grow.

    Once you stall, it's time to recycle and you will have to lower the food intake once again. The point is that food intake should follow effort, real effort, not just thinking you are working hard because you are starining.

    If at any point you feel you are getting to much fat, then it's time to cut some. Just don't think that it's time to cut because your abs begin to soften, that is just a good way to not make any progress at all.

    Note, I never once said to turn into a fat slob, like others want you to believe. Fear mongers.
    _________
    ______
    ___

    Off Road Journal

    http://www.wannabebig.com/logo/alnlogo_white.gif

    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

  12. #62
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Off Road View Post
    This will be the last time I reply to you in this thread...honestly, I get a headache every time you try to take the conversation somewhere it isn't intended to go

    Anytime you write something on a thread you should be prepared to defend what you said. It's that simple. If you dont like it, then dont reply but dont expect to not be called out when someone disagrees with specific things you've stated.

    ... I am not in this thread to debate the differences of slow bulking vs. fast bulking. I'm not interested in debating a what consitutes a preferred body fat percentage. I am simply trying to give hardgainers some tools to break out of their skinny bodies and do it in a sensible way.

    I never, ever mentioned anything about genetic ceilings. When you get there, please let me know.

    People love to believe they have the world's potential to make incredible gains.

    I recommend maintenance or very slight excess when people are introducing new exercises, routines, or are at the beginning of their cycles. They are NOT making "outstanding progress" at this point.

    Debatable. The Central Nervous system is learning to recruit fibers in specific ways for specific movements i.e the benchpress. You'll climb up in weights at this point. Sometimes over 10 lbs a week. This actually might be your best time to be making outstanding results. Are you for real?

    "Oustanding progress" takes gut busting efforts. Those efforts are going to require larger ammounts of food to recover and grow.

    Yes, and 500-1000 kcals is plenty. Anymore is pointless

    Once you stall, it's time to recycle and you will have to lower the food intake once again. The point is that food intake should follow effort, real effort, not just thinking you are working hard because you are starining.

    If at any point you feel you are getting to much fat, then it's time to cut some. Just don't think that it's time to cut because your abs begin to soften, that is just a good way to not make any progress at all.

    This would depend on someones goals entirely. lol

    Note, I never once said to turn into a fat slob, like others want you to believe. Fear mongers.
    Your definition of "true bulks" is surely going to get someone there though


    I am in agreement to eat more food to gain weight and that you may indeed gain some fat. It doesnt have to be much. 500-1000 kcals is more of a slight bulk and I agree you should aim for this. I do not agree that you need a "true-bulk" over this amount just because you've stalled. More food does not always mean more muscle. Thats silly. So I disagree, and thats fine. Theres no need to cry about it. We can have our own opinions. I would rather just see people tackle this is an intelligent way rather than pile on needless body fat because it may happen more often than you think.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  13. #63
    The Bulkness Cometh! BULK_BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ontario, CANADA !
    Posts
    1,386
    "If you want to build some muscle, then get as far away from your fat phobia as you can get. Don't be afraid to let your mid section soften up, knowing that under that layer of fatty goodness there are some real muscles being built."



    IF you are tired of being skinny after years (or months) of working out then this says it all. Period.
    "to teach God's word, by his own example; that we must Love all things that God made" - The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

    DL: 375 RAW No Belt, No Wraps, No nothing!
    SQ: 325 RAW " " "
    BP: 220 RAW " " "

    Total: 920 hahaha Not quite a 1000lbs (This was done back in 2008 )

  14. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,129
    I actually agree with both OR and Rich in this thread. Im still not sure why you guys are arguing.

    IF You can make consistant progress in both strength and size by doing a "slow bulk" then that is probably the best say. A surplus of 250-500kcals max would get this job done very well. And I agree with Rich in that the closer you get to your genetic ceiling, the "cleaner" your bulk should be. Also, the possibility of more complicated methods like cyclical dieting and nutrient timing become more imporant here as well.

    My biggest problem with this mentality is that it may be hard if not impossible to guage a 250-500kcal surplus consistantly. At least for me, I know depending on my daily activity level, my calorie expenditure could vary 500-1000 kcals easily. With gaining weight as a priority, there was no room for a "slow bulk"

    And I agree with what OR said, that when you are pushing things to the limits in the gym, you need to BULK. In this case, fat gain might even be very difficult, but more importantly than anything you are looking for progress on your lifts that will eventually lead to a better body. EAT BIG HERE.

    The problem with this. I myself, and a lot of other people ALWAYS train this way. There are other ways around it, but people that push their bodies hard will often need more food than they think to progress. Low volume and abbreviated routines can help with this, but eventually if you want to be big, you'll have to eat more.

    But I have to disagree with OR's statement about newer lifters not bulking. This is just a too simplistic approach to take without further info. There was another thread recently where the poster was starting SS and weighed 280lbs. In this case, he probably is already eating enough, and a slight deficit was recommended. But often times, novice lifters are underweight. They often weigh in the 135-150lb range for men. This simply means they are either not eating very much, or they have a very high activity level. In starting to train for strength, they need to create a surplus by either eating more, or cutting other activities, or both. They dont need a huge 1000+ kcal BULK, but they need to put on weight. Even further, a lot of "skinny" people would gain muscle if they just ate more, even if they didn't lift weights. When you are starting out, if you eat and lift, you'll grow pretty quickly. If you dont eat, and just lift, there is a good chance you'll just get stronger, and gain no size. Then these lifters will go on to believe strength has nothing to do with size, and get on GVT and be screwed for life.

    Tired of being skinny? EAT! /end thread

  15. #65
    Moderator Off Road's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    I have to disagree with OR's statement about newer lifters not bulking. .. often times, novice lifters are underweight. They often weigh in the 135-150lb range for men. This simply means they are either not eating very much, or they have a very high activity level. In starting to train for strength, they need to create a surplus by either eating more, or cutting other activities, or both.
    That is correct and also what I said. Guys just starting out should eat at maintenance or in a "slight bulk."
    _________
    ______
    ___

    Off Road Journal

    http://www.wannabebig.com/logo/alnlogo_white.gif

    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

  16. #66
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Excellent points Dan.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    201
    Agree. I put on 24 lbs in the last 20 weeks lifting and eating.

    I'm still not down with getting over fat though. Life it too short to look like a slob. 15% BF and it's diet time.

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli View Post
    I actually agree with both OR and Rich in this thread. Im still not sure why you guys are arguing.

    IF You can make consistant progress in both strength and size by doing a "slow bulk" then that is probably the best say. A surplus of 250-500kcals max would get this job done very well. Tired of being skinny? EAT! /end thread
    Disagree. I tried the lean slow bulk crap. I'm pretty convinced it simply doesn't work.

    I was 130 lbs and 250-500 calorie surpluses would give me a few lbs than it's almost like my metabolism just adjusted and it would come off. Strength gains sucked as well. I had to eat like 800-1200 + surplus to make any difference.

    Funny thing is, it works the same with losing weight. 500 caloire deficits do jack squat. Your metabolism adjusts and you go nowhere.

    Exreams are where it's at.

  19. #69
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Yamar View Post
    Disagree. I tried the lean slow bulk crap. I'm pretty convinced it simply doesn't work.

    I was 130 lbs and 250-500 calorie surpluses would give me a few lbs than it's almost like my metabolism just adjusted and it would come off. Strength gains sucked as well. I had to eat like 800-1200 + surplus to make any difference.

    Funny thing is, it works the same with losing weight. 500 caloire deficits do jack squat. Your metabolism adjusts and you go nowhere.

    Exreams are where it's at.
    Some people can vary. But most people think slower bulks dont work because they are using their scale weight and not gaining a lb a week. Bad news is, you cannot gain a lb of muscle a week..unless you're investing a lot of money into some drugs.

    Now, if you gained 25 solid lbs in a year, thats less than half a lb a week. More like .4. But because of varying glucose and water and crap, people can get discouraged. I think somewhere in the middle is always best in any approach.

    About the 500 kcal deficit, your metabolism is actually more likely to adjust to more severe restrictions. As in, your metabolism slows down to sustain itself and create a new maintenance.
    Last edited by RichMcGuire; 01-22-2011 at 06:23 PM.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  20. #70
    Rory Parker Behemoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    5,322
    Really, there's a lot more to it than just "I'm not gaining guess I automatically need to eat more." Just like a dieting stall doesn't immediately merit a calorie drop a gaining or bulking stall doesn't immediately merit a calorie increase.

    If one ceases to gain on calories they were once gaining well on. 9/10 it's probably better for the trainee to first back off the food and clean it up for a few weeks. Hopefully re-establish some better insulin sensitivity and then bump the food back up.
    accuflex - LOLZZZZ!!!11one1!! SOEM PPL WORK THRE ARMZ!!!!11!! LETS KILL THEM111

    "You can fake effort with grunts and clanging weights but quiet, consistent hard work coupled with gradual strength increases earns universal respect in gyms" - Steve Colescott



    I'd rather Situation be a member of this board. -Joey54

  21. #71
    Senior Member RichMcGuire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Behemoth View Post
    Really, there's a lot more to it than just "I'm not gaining guess I automatically need to eat more." Just like a dieting stall doesn't immediately merit a calorie drop a gaining or bulking stall doesn't immediately merit a calorie increase.

    If one ceases to gain on calories they were once gaining well on. 9/10 it's probably better for the trainee to first back off the food and clean it up for a few weeks. Hopefully re-establish some better insulin sensitivity and then bump the food back up.
    I agree with this 100%. If things were always so simple, there would be a lot more productive trainees out there.
    First Bulk pics VS Starting pics, take a look!! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/show...=1#post1616109

    Progress pics of a cut using bodyweight only movements http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...45#post2405745

    Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom". -Belial

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMcGuire View Post
    Some people can vary.
    About the 500 kcal deficit, your metabolism is actually more likely to adjust to more severe restrictions. As in, your metabolism slows down to sustain itself and create a new maintenance.

    That's why we discovered refeeds.

    I have been tracking and trending diet and mass gains/losses for years now. WHat I discovered is I tend to have a window- 150-2500 calories I don't gain no lose weight, that was at 130 lbs. I had to go 3000-3200 for a one lb gain per week. Mathmaticly it doesn't make sense that if I can eat at say 2000 cals and not gain no lose you can call that maintenacen. Than eat at 2500 should equate to 1 lb per week (500x7 days= 3500 cals), only I don't gain crap. Eat at 3000 and I finally started to gain a lb.

    Regarding losing weight/fat I have to do 800-1000 calories to lose 1 lb per week. I found I can get around metebolic slowdown by implementing 3 day refeeds (al la UD2 style).

  23. #73
    Skinny Feet Kiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    South East England
    Posts
    2,789
    Quote Originally Posted by Behemoth View Post
    If one ceases to gain on calories they were once gaining well on. 9/10 it's probably better for the trainee to first back off the food and clean it up for a few weeks. Hopefully re-establish some better insulin sensitivity and then bump the food back up.

    Rory,

    Any chance you can either expand on this a bit more for me/us or link to a theory/article on it?

    Cheers mate
    http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/sho...?136143-Hct-12

    A Westside journal.

    'There are no layby's on the road to strength'

    'The greatest pleasure in life is achieving things people said you could not achieve'

    'He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man'

  24. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Yamar View Post
    That's why we discovered refeeds.

    I have been tracking and trending diet and mass gains/losses for years now. WHat I discovered is I tend to have a window- 150-2500 calories I don't gain no lose weight, that was at 130 lbs. I had to go 3000-3200 for a one lb gain per week. Mathmaticly it doesn't make sense that if I can eat at say 2000 cals and not gain no lose you can call that maintenacen. Than eat at 2500 should equate to 1 lb per week (500x7 days= 3500 cals), only I don't gain crap. Eat at 3000 and I finally started to gain a lb.

    Regarding losing weight/fat I have to do 800-1000 calories to lose 1 lb per week. I found I can get around metebolic slowdown by implementing 3 day refeeds (al la UD2 style).
    A little confused by some of your numbers here, but Id have to say the body isn't a machine and applying mathematics to it is close to piontless.

    People try to bring the laws of thermodynamics into it, but they dont understand them completely. Sure, if there is a change in energy balance, then more energy will be stored or expended and there will be a change in mass. But the body is a very complex system and changing one thing usually changes many others. So as you eat more, your metabolism may increase, or you may have extra energy to work in the gym. You may actually increase calories by 250 and end up losing weight. Ive noticed the best way is to either shoot for a huge 500-1000kcal surplus or aim for 250-500kcal surplus and reduce activity drastically.

  25. #75
    Administrator chris mason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    12,691
    The body wants to stay in homeostasis that includes maintaining a certain body weight. For younger men who have trouble gaining weight adding just a few hundred calories usually won't do it as the body will adjust to account for the extra caloric intake.


    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

Similar Threads

  1. tired of being skinny
    By bender8 in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 02-15-2010, 01:22 PM
  2. always tired
    By jurzysfinest in forum General Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-22-2007, 10:34 PM
  3. 19, And tired of being skinny.
    By DeviceX in forum Members' Pics and Videos
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 10-07-2006, 04:47 PM
  4. tired
    By Praetorian in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-23-2002, 01:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •